This is an Awareness Blog to consider the future of your world. Actions are being done now to restore our world. Watch and become AWARE!
3.5 MILLION VIEWS PER MONTH
Exclusive public outlet for documentation and notices from The Original Jurisdiction Republic 1861 circa 2010.

Saturday, May 27, 2017

What Will this Next Civil War Look Like?

A Prelude...

PRELUDE

Make no doubt about it, in much the same way that Abraham Lincoln’s election in 1860 prompted the first Civil War, the election of Donald Trump in 2016 has prompted this second one.

While ostensibly over slavery, what the election of the Republicans in 1860 signaled was the end of an era, that era beginning in 1824-1828 with the creation of the original Democrat Party, whose cynical purpose was to hold onto political power by maintaining slavery well beyond any economic usefulness, around which almost all American politics would revolve so that the Union would be forever split into two camps of equal electoral size divided by an issue about which there could never be any agreement.

Sound familiar?

While the political parties were held in balance by slavery, they could then go about debating every other issue: taxation, tariffs, national banks, westward expansion in the back and forth fashion American politics has always been defined to be. Cynical, it was still a masterful business model drafted by the Democrats’ original founders, Martin Van Buren and Andrew Jackson.

What the Democrats did not foresee was that it would only take a single generation, roughly thirty (30) years for that failing economic model to be etched into half the national fabric as a socio-cultural, religious and philosophical icon – as a way of life to be protected politically, and a cause to die for.

Sound familiar?

I’d love to discuss this over a bottle of Scotland’s best, but fast forward to 2016 and consider the parallels, namely two intransigent sides fighting over the very root of what it means to be American, when only fifty years ago, two generations, “liberals” as they were known then, largely agreed with the rest of Americans about the fundamental foundations, the institutional building blocks of the Republic, as designed by the Founders in 1776 and 1787.

I won’t wax poetic about the resume this still-imperfect union had built by the 1960s. But it is prodigious, and built entirely by men and women the rest of the world had cast off, it’s detritus. At the time of the first Civil War we were still largely an Anglo-Saxon Protestant nation, but by the early 20th Century, “the shoulders we all stand on” included cast-offs from Eastern Europe, the Far East, and then Latin America and Africa, so that now every American shares that same one aspect, arising out of forbears who were low-born, all our generations, “risen.”

Why that all changed in the 1960s was not because America had fallen on hard times. In fact the generation of the 60s were themselves sired by a generation who had known hard times as no other Americans ever had, and then, just as they were bouncing out of it, had to postpone life for another five years to go fight two wars to liberate half the rest of the world, over a quarter-of-million of them postponing life for an eternity.

It was as if Poland, and others, when they sent their poor and ragged to America in the 1890s, they were really investing in a term life policy in America, so that their grandchildren could then come and rescue them.

Why that generation-to-generation continuity did not continue for a large portion of the children of the 60s, I can’t say. I have my theories as I’m sure do many others. But what can be said with some certainly, as one veteran I knew, speaking of Bill Clinton, put it that when our generation came to its crossroad, the best went one way, while sadly, too many of the brightest went the other. As many as a third, if my rough count in law school is any indicator.

The current generation of millennials are their grandchildren, just coming to full bloom. And suddenly I’m filled with remorse for we (my generation) should have seen this day coming when Reagan left office. All the signs were there. We just missed them (or ignored them).

So it should come as no surprise that the corpus of the voters who elected Donald Trump in 2016 were made up of citizens who, shall we say, had been around the block a few times. We were the grateful ones, children who had been raised to know gratitude, especially for those shoulders we stand on. So it figures many of our children who were raised similarly also supported Trump. That is the bloodline we’d like to see revived in America, and passed on.

If there are objectives from our side in this civil war, this is it…restoring the process of passing the Constitutional blueprint onto future generations.

Trump’s election was about a restoration, although, much as some of the early founders of the Republican Party in the 1850s quietly knew, at some point their political victory would signal an equally resolute, and possibly violent reaction. That is happening now.

Analysts such as myself, not inured to the narrow world view found inside the establishment of Washington, instead immersed in the much broader life perspectives of the ordinary citizenry, (ironically referred to as “parochial” and “nativist” inside the DC circle) knew at least from the ascension of Barack Obama, that the Left had, or soon would “go all in” in for their dream of throwing down the old Constitutional blueprint and launch us into a new world order, a globalist vision, a corporate-cartelist vision instead of the old-style socialist image we’d always imagined. We only fit this last piece in the puzzle late in the Obama era.

But all in all, the speed with which they came out of their respective closets about their real ambitions, and their disdain for the Constitution, not to mention for the simple minds who still clung to it, was stunning.

What we did know by 2010, was that if we could win again, they (the Left we’ll call them until a better label comes along) would not go quietly into the night, even though Peggy Noonan thinks they should, and Jeb Bush still believes that they can be talked over. (I’m not sure what Jeb’s big brother thinks, but at this point I’m beginning not to care.)

The Left knew exactly what the tea party movement was all about as a threat when it first emerged in 2010, on the heels of Obamacare’s passage, but predictably, they viewed the tea party as a monolith, as they might design it themselves, for they have no real idea of genuinely grass-roots, spontaneous “movements.” So immediately they began attacking harmless straw-man faux tea party groups who gained prominence with a donor base with large DONATE buttons, but no influence, allowing the real tea party movement to move forward as a native stealth phenomenon who would emerge in 2016 to elect a new type of president.

And the Left totally mis-assessed the common sense and brain power in those old mom-and-pop relics, who, I argued in 2010 had surpassed the Left in knowledge of American history and government (i.e. Civics, see (Richard) DreyfussCivicsInitiative) and by 2016, had left “National Review’s” idea of conservatism laying in the dust.

No one ever went broke underestimating the Left’s inability to size up their enemies. Which is why I’m writing this piece now. SitRep, 2017

What we knew by 2010, was that the Democrat Left had a plan to steal America away through process, to use the constitutional system to provide the means for its own eventual disassembly.

And they almost pulled it off.

I am sure Barack Obama, a waffling sort of true believer, is probably going through some existential moments right now, much as the valiant and esteemed (sic) French General Louis Trochu must have felt before he surrendered Paris to the Germans in 1871 after his own design for the city’s defense backfired, and in typical French fashion, he had no Plan B.

I think Obama knows he made a serious mistake in laying a path for Hillary Clinton to the presidency, especially since he doesn’t like her, and they share entirely different ideas about that authoritarian utopia. Remember, Hillary’s ideal of a ruling autocracy is more in line with that of the Bedouin princess. Now Obama must decide whether to fight to recapture probably what can’t be recaptured, namely power through electoral process, or flee to a safe sanctuary and live out his days very well in retirement, but relative obscurity. Forever the ditherer, he’ll likely choose a middle course, hanging around hoping someone will call for him to ride in to rescue, but only if there are no great risks. But his place in history is being diminished daily, so therein lies the internal conflict…perspirationless comfort versus teeth-gnashing risk.

In short, being a process guy, thus shutting down the use of brute force when he was up on the horse, should he now risk resorting to it now to take back power now that he and his army are afoot. Or, should he take the advice Allende refused and retreat into seclusion?

But by the 2016 campaign season, even before Trump emerged, it was generally believed that all the elements of the Democrat alliance would be enough to put Hillary over the top, and the Obama reign would move into its final phase. By temperament, Hillary would have been the perfect hammer to put the final nails in Liberty’s coffin in America.

Whatever Hillary’s known (only to them) disabilities, the movers of the Party never imagined that the people acting alone would ever be able to derail her.

Of course we now know that Trump, like Aragorn’s summoning of the Army of the Dead, found voters the Democrats had forgotten they once had, and had dismissed, including millions of rank-and-file white working union members, who Ronald Reagan also once stole. Hillary’s slovenly campaigning, general demeanor of entitlement, plus rumors of her ill-temper and criminal dishonesty, suddenly mattered.

And she lost.

But what she lost was more than the Left could afford to lose, for they no longer have any cavalry. Horses. And no army. No national police force who will only answer to the master’s voice. And outside of a few Blue cities not even local police could be relied upon to carry the Left’s war forward to gain new territory, not even across the bridge to Brooklyn, much less up river to Yonkers.

An army without a horse becomes a besieged fortress, no more, no less.

With no means to force their will on the people of the United States outside the Blue zones they already control, (see the map)

…save a few federal district judges, college professors, school districts and city/county governments, which I’ll discuss in Part II-III, the power of the Left, however they can be portrayed in the media, will be just as you see them here, small islands, or fortresses, which they will fight mightily to protect, but with no power whatsoever to sally forth to claim new territory.

Their only route to achieving power nationally would be through a power-sharing arrangement with the Republicans, who share many interests with the Democrats. (Note to GOP: Lenin cut similar deals with his generation’s useful idiots in 1918-1920, in Russia’s Duma and intellectual community, to assist in the Bolsheviks seizing power…then sending them all off to the Gulag once safely in power.)

Interdicting this party collaboration should be a major front in our counter-attacks on the Left going forward, (again see Part III), not only by direct communications with the GOP members and state/national headquarters, but in rolling back the Left’s onslaughts in the streets, inasmuch as they are designed to sway GOP members. Let them know the media propaganda campaign is not working, and their jobs are still at risk of having their heads shaved if they collaborate.

This can be done, as I’ll explain later.

“Militarily” these will appear as little more than mop-up operations, as they will change the map very little, but they could have a very meaningful effect on the 2018 elections, as a statement to voters national that the Make America Great Again movement has not gone into retirement, but has moved into a higher gear. And new recruits are welcome.

Changing the map will take many years. But changing the color from blue to a lighter shade of pale will have much to say about just how courageous Republicans who want to keep their jobs will feel by sidling up with bi-partisan babble once it’s made clear that the single purpose of those people across the aisle is to X-out the Constitution of the United States.

Nesaranews Mission Statement

Question -- What is the goal of this website? Why do we share different sources of information that sometimes conflicts or might even be considered disinformation?

Answer -- The primary goal of Nesaranews is to help all people become better truth-seekers in a real-time boots-on-the-ground fashion. This is for the purpose of learning to think critically, discovering the truth from within—not just believing things blindly because it came from an "authority" or credible source. Instead of telling you what the truth is, we share information from many sources so that you can discern it for yourself. We focus on teaching you the tools to become your own authority on the truth, gaining self-mastery, sovereignty, and freedom in the process. We want each of you to become your own leaders and masters of personal discernment, and as such, all information should be vetted, analyzed and discerned at a personal level. We also encourage you to discuss your thoughts in the comments section of this site to engage in a group discernment process.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." – Aristotle

11

Followers

The articles on this blog are reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.

US Supreme Court, in 1985, “Dowling v. United States”, unequivocally held that allegations of copyright infringement can be prosecuted only under copyright-specific legislation, not criminal law.